I definitely do agree, that the content type should rule where possible. In addition this is not a case, when some compromises need to be done, as not-named wide spread browser don't even recognize application/xhtml+xml type :)
Thanks
Pavel
Michael Lefevre wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pavel Hlavnicka wrote:
The best posts in news are always the self-replied ones :)
certainly :)
Sorry I bothered you. One more question (and I do not expect you to tell: "wow, what a nice idea, let's change it!" :) Why mime type wins over the DTD declaration (and even over the <?xml?> pragma)? Isn't the <?xml?> prolog enough to tell, ok, this is a xml file?
I believe that is specified by the standards - if there is a MIME type specified for the document, then the browser must use it, no matter what is inside the file. Unfortunately, not all browsers follow this standard.
It also, I guess, makes it easier for the browser to deal with - it knows whether it is dealing with XML or HTML from the beginning, rather than having to check a couple of tags first. That kind of thing is an issue with character sets - if they are specified in the header, Mozilla can do the right thing from the start. If they are in a document tag, then it starts with a default character set until it finds the tag with a character set, and then has to start again using the specified character set.
-- Pavel Hlavnicka Ginger Alliance www.gingerall.com
